At the risk of over-analyzing this one, let’s just say up front that CBS’ Rita Braver, whose husband—lawyer Robert B. Barnett, who represented Lynne Cheney in the publishing deal for her new memoir, Blue Skies, No Fences—should not have interviewed Mrs. Cheney about her book on CBS’ “Sunday Morning” this past weekend.
It’s a no-brainer, even given the fact that CBS included a statement of disclosure before running the segment. Braver obviously stands to gain financially from the interview, since it publicizes a segment of her husband’s business. Disclosure statements aren’t meant to be some kind of universal get-out-of-jail-free card, they’re supposed to be used when a reporter who has some connection to the story—either real or perceived—is involved in producing the story, or when it is felt that the connection doesn’t rise to the level of true conflict. Disclosures like the one CBS ran before the segment cheapen the idea of disclosure statements, since Braver in no way had to report the story. Is CBS short of correspondents capable of asking a few questions?
As a side note, I can’t help but wonder what the reaction would be if some big-name blogger had done something like this. It would have been open season on the blogosphere, with lamentations over the amateurish, rule-free environment that blogs inhabit, with the mainstream media gleefully tisk-tisking over their misguided young cousins. CBS was wrong, and no disclosure statement can change that.





A bit more honest than 'fake but accurate', but still pretty bad.
Posted by spacemonkey
on Tue 30 Oct 2007 at 11:53 PM
Look at it this way. Before the era of blogging, CBS would have probably foregone the disclaimer entirely, under the (correct) assumption that even if someone had discovered the link, there would have been no easy way for them to call CBS on it. The presence of the disclaimer is an admission by CBS that they better be more upfront about their dirty work, lest a blogger unmask them.
Now if we could just stop them from doing the dirty work...
Posted by Kimberly
on Wed 31 Oct 2007 at 08:32 AM
Sorry, no sale. There are three glaring problems with your analysis.
First, who else at CBS, the bastion of open minds, would interview Mrs. Cheney? Or, at least interview her about her book rather than her "evil" husband?
Second, compare the "full and prior disclosure" to campaign contributions. CBS, and the rest of the reporting world, routinely ignore Democratic fund raising scandals. You'll note that contributors in those scandals had financial gains in mind but were safely hidden behind arcane and Byzantine campaign finance laws. You *might* find out who they were well after the fact, whereas you knew the arrangement between Braver and Cheney before the fact.
Third, why no mention of the incestuous relationships the press have with Democratic politicians, pundits, donors? Why not disclose those? Oh, right, they're all just honest, hard-working folks. Not like Lynne Cheney and her "evil" husband.
Let's examine the outcome of your conflict of interest policy - it would end the press coverage of the Democratic Party. On reflection, you might have just made a sale...
Posted by Curly Smith
on Wed 31 Oct 2007 at 08:43 AM